Rajasthan Government vs LALCHAND AND ORS Advocate - SH. SHISRAM SAINI — 112/2019
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 323,341,325,34. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 19th March 2026.
Cr. Reg. Case - CR. REGULAR
CNR: RJJH070001772019
Filing Number
174/2019
Filing Date
08-02-2019
Registration No
112/2019
Registration Date
08-02-2019
Court
ACJM MJM Khetri Taluka HQ
Judge
3-JM
Decision Date
19th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
2
Police Station
KHETRI
Year
2019
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Rajasthan Government
Adv. APP1
Respondent(s)
LALCHAND AND ORS Advocate - SH. SHISRAM SAINI
Hearing History
Judge: 3-JM
Orders
Restored
Disposed
Defence Evidence
Defence Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 19-03-2026 | Orders |
| 19-03-2026 | Restored |
| 19-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 17-03-2026 | Defence Evidence |
| 12-03-2026 | Defence Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Rajasthan State v. Lalchand and Others (Case 112/2019) Decision: The court acquitted both accused Lalchand (age 60) and Bala Devi (age 50) of charges under IPC Sections 323, 341, and 325/34 (wrongful restraint, voluntary causing hurt, and causing grievous hurt). Key Reasoning: The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the alleged offenses. Despite the complainant (Vinod Kumar, a police officer) testifying about being assaulted on December 31, 2018, the court noted critical evidentiary gaps: no medical examination corroborated serious injuries, independent eyewitnesses recanted their initial statements or were deemed hostile, and inconsistencies in the complaint undermined credibility. The court determined sufficient doubt existed regarding the accused's involvement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Rajasthan State v. Lalchand and Others (Case 112/2019) Decision: The court acquitted both accused Lalchand (age 60) and Bala Devi (age 50) of charges under IPC Sections 323, 341, and 325/34 (wrongful restraint, voluntary causing hurt, and causing grievous hurt). Key Reasoning: The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the alleged offenses. Despite the complainant (Vinod Kumar, a police officer) testifying about being assaulted on December 31, 2018, the court noted critical evidentiary gaps: no medical examination corroborated serious injuries, independent eyewitnesses recanted their initial statements or were deemed hostile, and inconsistencies in the complaint undermined credibility. The court determined sufficient doubt existed regarding the accused's involvement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts